Car Review: 2013 Ford C-Max Hybrid

A case of mysterious fuel economy

Originally published: December 18, 2012

SMALL

MEDIUM

LARGE

Because fuel economy and emissions are the top subject being discussed regarding automobiles these days and the car being tested is a hybrid — North America’s chosen saviour (at least according to the media and Toyota advertisements) in our war on profligacy and pollution — you’d think that the road tests of Ford’s new C-Max would be resplendent in their discussions of the car’s actual, on-road stinginess. Since I was wondering whether my own real-world fuel economy figures jibed with what other testers were finding, I entrusted the ever-powerful Google god to provide me with some context.

I got just about nothing. Trolling through road test after road test, many of them from those big-buck enthusiast books south of the border, I came across review after review that did nothing but extoll the C-Max’s 47/47 (US) mile per gallon city/hwy EPA-rated fuel economy figures, compared them with the Prius V’s (the C-Max’s direct competition) 44/40 figures and called it a day. No extensive data detailing their real-world numbers after thousands of miles of vigorous testing. Not even some preliminary figures — with the necessary caveats that the tabulations weren’t final — from some short exploratory trip. With the exception of the Post’s own Gabriel Gelinas and Automobile magazine, I couldn’t find any fuel economy information about the new Ford, despite virtually every major automobile media outlet having tested it. Of course, some blogger is now going to write in and tell me that I somehow missed their exhaustive compilation of data, but it doesn’t change the fact that a bunch of major magazines simply didn’t report anything, preliminary, caveat-ridden or otherwise, on the most important aspect of the C-Max’s performance.

The reason I went looking for second opinions is that I simply didn’t trust my own data collection for, no matter what I did with the C-Max, I always came back with the same fuel economy figure: 7.5 L/100 km. When I would drive it on stop-and-go side streets exclusively, the same number would pop up: 7.5. I tried combining urban travel in equal measures with some highway cruising, but again with the 7.5. And, when I stuck the good ship C-Max into cruise control at a steady 120 kilometres an hour, the little digital readout again displayed 7.5. It was only, in frustration, that when I set the cruise to a lower 110 km/h that any other number, 7.1, managed to sneak through what I was beginning to think was some sort of digital filter.

Thus, my search for context. My first stop was Transport Canada’s website, which rated the C-Max at 4.0 L/100 km for the city and 4.1 on the highway. It is obviously way off the mark, mainly because Transport Canada uses a very simplistic (and, many think, boneheaded) testing methodology. The EPA’s 47 (US) mpg figure turns out to be 5.0 L/100, slightly more realistic, but still a long way removed from the 7.5 that kept flashing on my C-Max’s dash (and, lest anyone accuse me of rampant lead-footery, the long-term average for this C-Max’s lifetime fuel economy was 7.6 L/100 km). Let’s just mark it down as condemnation of the various testing regimes (which tend to favour hybrids).

Comparing those numbers with other cars recently tested, it’s hard not to be envious of that 7.5 L/100 km figure in the city. Even diesels can’t match that frugality and even the smallest of conventional cars struggle to better 9 L/100 km in my real world — oh my God, Two and a Half Men is on in 10 minutes — driving.

As for the overall figure — and I apologize for being so boring as to write that same number, 7.5 L/100 km, yet again — it is neither exemplary or bad. Compacts, a few stingy family sedans and the occasional diesel can sometimes match that figure, so, depending on your driving habits, the complex hybrid system may, or may not, be worth the asking price.

Seven-point-five (that’s me trying to break the monotony) on the highway, though, is disappointing. Under exactly the same conditions — same road, cruise control — an Audi A6 achieved an almost identical 7.6 L/100 km (though, for perspective, it sucked back about 14 L/100 km in town). Numerous other larger and more powerful cars, thanks to slippery aerodynamics and eight-speed transmissions that reduce engine speed to almost idle, are capable of equally stingy numbers.

The reason for the seeming discrepancies are two-fold: the tall frontal aspect of the C-Max’s body and the relatively large (compared with the Prius V that Ford is competing with) 2.0-litre engine.

The C-Max’s tall profile, excellent for headroom and allowing the upright seating positions (which allows for more legroom), unfortunately also increases the Ford’s aerodynamic profile. While aero drag doesn’t come into play in city driving, it’s a major contributor in highway fuel economy.

As is the C-Max’s gasoline engine. At 120 km/h, the hybrid’s electric motor is offering virtually no assistance to the internal combustion engine, so the 2.0L four banger does most of the job. With a relatively large engine — which contributes to the C-Max’s Prius V-besting 188 horsepower — pushing a fairly unaerodynamic shape that is quite heavy (1,655 kilograms), it’s little wonder the C-Max’s highway fuel economy is nothing to write home about.

So, the question remains: Is the new C-Max a good buy? And the answer remains how and where you will be driving it. As a city commuter, the C-Max is a relatively good bet. It has plenty of room for passengers and their cargo and its driving habits are stellar. If, however, most of your driving is on the open road and you don’t plan to hyper-mile it in the slow lane, the C-Max’s fuel economy just isn’t enough to warrant its price premium versus other offerings such as the Mazda CX-5. When it comes to fuel economy, where you drive matters as much as what you drive.